D.R.VITHAL RAO, K.R.RAMASWAMY IYENGAR, SUSHEELA CHELUVARAJU
K. C. THIMMAIAH – Appellant
Versus
BAJAJ ELECTRONICS – Respondent
Mr. Justice D.R. Vithal Rao, President — In this complaint, the complainant has sought refund of the deposits made by him with the opposite party with interest thereon.
2. This complaint was filed on 26.3.1990. It could not be taken up for enquiry as there was stay order issued by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka. After the stay was vacated, the enquiry was taken-up.
3. A notice was issued to one Sri. Paramjit Singh, M/s. Man-Jog Builders, Bangalore. Mr. Paramjit Singh, denied his liability regarding the deposits made by the complainant. So the complainant submitted to make M/s. Bajaj Electronics, a Proprietory concern of Sri. Manjit Singh son of Mr. Awatar Singh, Bangalore, to be made as a party and issue notice to him as the deposits were made with M/s. Bajaj Electronics”. This submission of the complainant was accepted as it is evident from the order sheet dated 1-10-92 and a notice was issued to M/s. Bajaj Electronics the Proprietory concern of Mr. Manjit Singh. The opposite party, Mr. Manjit Singh, appeared and filed statement of objections.
4. It is the case of the complainant that the opposite party floated a financing scheme under the name of M/s. Bajaj Electronics, Ba
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.